Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Yup, DA1 was just awfully boring, and, while BG series had a serious enemies here (and once a heavy armored ones too), mainly because of RTwP thingy and endless whining about not-a-pixel-perfect-pathfinding A.I (totally ignoring fact of manual control), it's at least not boring game and give you much more strategic/combat control about your team. DA1 just pretends to be like BG, while is not. Definitely.

I like the way you can combine spells and talents in DA system, it offers some tactical combat possibilities. Its RTwP system seems to be smoother than BG's, which is actually incline. Yeah, it is boring in some parts, but what I mean is that DA doesn't deserve to be listed along such atrocities as Fallout 3 or fucking Skyrim. Name me a better game released after 2007 and then criticize DA for being decline.

"The rabble of Socialists, the apostles to the Chandala, who undermine the workingman's instincts, his pleasure, his feeling of contentment with his petty existence—who make him envious and teach him revenge… Wrong never lies in unequal rights; it lies in the assertion of "equal" rights… What is bad? But I have already answered: all that proceeds from weakness, from envy, from revenge.—The anarchist and the Christian have the same ancestry…" - Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist

I'm pretty sure Zevran starts flirting with you almost instantly unless you kill him the moment you meet him (which is something I regret not doing when I played the game). I finished both BGs and the first KotoR without even realizing there were romances in those games, but in DA:O that stuff just keeps jumping on your face every time you talk to someone. It really takes some effort to avoid romance in that game. It made Mass Effect feel subtle.

Click to expand...

Did modders fix it?

Click to expand...

They did. I can now see elf and dwarf cocks in the game which is exactly what I wanted.

Name me a better game released after 2007 and then criticize DA for being decline.

Click to expand...

I don't like terms "decline"/"incline" of genre, because definition of genre is rather vague. A better "mainstream" RPG then DA1 after circa about 2007? Gothic 3 or Risen or Divinity 2 (DKS/ED) for example. Imho, of course.

Ps. Some people may add also, such titles like "Two Worlds" (one/two/addons) but they are rather peculiar RPG's, but still...

I'd avoid New Vegas entirely. I think the proper decline progression is BG->BG2->DA1->DA2->Oblivion->FO3->ME1->ME2->ME3->KotOR1->SWtOR->Call of Duty MW3->Angry Birds->Tic-Tac-Toe. Of course you have to play each game 7 times to get the full effect.

I liked DA:O. Sure, it's no masterpiece, but it's a decent game. There are some significant pros and significant cons to the game. Overall though, I'd say it was quite enjoyable.

It's one of the better mainstream RPGs released in recent years (of which I feel NV was the best). That's not really saying much, but it's an RPG with a decent stats (not twitch) based combat system, some nice instances of C&C and a story that's mostly coherent and internally consistent.

Say what you will about gay elf sex, but it's definite over what BioWare and most of the industry does now.

Anyways, no delve into the depths of the is complete without Arcania/Gothic 4. Or that loverslab place for Bethesda mods. Motherfucker that place is depraved.

I'd avoid New Vegas entirely. I think the proper decline progression is BG->BG2->DA1->DA2->Oblivion->FO3->ME1->ME2->ME3->KotOR1->SWtOR->Call of Duty MW3->Angry Birds->Tic-Tac-Toe. Of course you have to play each game 7 times to get the full effect.

Click to expand...

I don't see how Angry Birds nor Tic-Tac-Toe are decline. One was made specifically for mass appeal and casual gaming, and succeeds tremendously. The other is one of the first multiplayer games young children pick up, with a simple ruleset (which is easily solved by the time kids reach two digits of age). CoD and MW3 are just doing what FPS' have always been about, so there's no decline there, it has always been stale and unoriginal. I personally don't play these games, but it seems odd to lump games of a different category amongst Bioturds. In terms of entertainment value, I personally rather play a casual game than the most recent Bioware offerings. Atleast I won't have gay romance being force fed on me half the game.

A better "mainstream" RPG then DA1 after circa about 2007? Gothic 3 or Risen or Divinity 2 (DKS/ED) for example. Imho, of course.

Click to expand...

Gothic 3 was released in 2006, Risen is simply a game of different calliber (single character, small amount of game content) and thus quite mediocre. I haven't played Divinity 2, though, but isn't it hack'n'slash? I'm talking about full-fledged RPGs with party, NPC interactions, skill checks, a robust character system, of which Dragon age is quite probably the only solid example after 2007.

CoD and MW3 are just doing what FPS' have always been about, so there's no decline there, it has always been stale and unoriginal.

Click to expand...

Yes, the first person shooters have always been about sitting behind a cover with a bunch of unkillable companions and regenerating your wounds simply by ducking.

As for romances in DA, they are completely ignorable if you choose so. Even though Zevran begins flirting with you immediately, you can simply turn him down. Such things happen in real life so I don't see a problem that some NPCs are so aggresively advancing.

"The rabble of Socialists, the apostles to the Chandala, who undermine the workingman's instincts, his pleasure, his feeling of contentment with his petty existence—who make him envious and teach him revenge… Wrong never lies in unequal rights; it lies in the assertion of "equal" rights… What is bad? But I have already answered: all that proceeds from weakness, from envy, from revenge.—The anarchist and the Christian have the same ancestry…" - Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist

I'd avoid New Vegas entirely. I think the proper decline progression is BG->BG2->DA1->DA2->Oblivion->FO3->ME1->ME2->ME3->KotOR1->SWtOR->Call of Duty MW3->Angry Birds->Tic-Tac-Toe. Of course you have to play each game 7 times to get the full effect.

Click to expand...

I don't see how Angry Birds nor Tic-Tac-Toe are decline. One was made specifically for mass appeal and casual gaming, and succeeds tremendously. The other is one of the first multiplayer games young children pick up, with a simple ruleset (which is easily solved by the time kids reach two digits of age). CoD and MW3 are just doing what FPS' have always been about, so there's no decline there, it has always been stale and unoriginal. I personally don't play these games, but it seems odd to lump games of a different category amongst Bioturds. In terms of entertainment value, I personally rather play a casual game than the most recent Bioware offerings. Atleast I won't have gay romance being force fed on me half the game.

I like the way you can combine spells and talents in DA system, it offers some tactical combat possibilities. Its RTwP system seems to be smoother than BG's, which is actually incline. Yeah, it is boring in some parts, but what I mean is that DA doesn't deserve to be listed along such atrocities as Fallout 3 or fucking Skyrim. Name me a better game released after 2007 and then criticize DA for being decline.

Whoops, definitely KotC. But then again, what else? I have beaten KotC and I don't feel like playing it forever. DA, on the other hand, offers many hours of gameplay.

"The rabble of Socialists, the apostles to the Chandala, who undermine the workingman's instincts, his pleasure, his feeling of contentment with his petty existence—who make him envious and teach him revenge… Wrong never lies in unequal rights; it lies in the assertion of "equal" rights… What is bad? But I have already answered: all that proceeds from weakness, from envy, from revenge.—The anarchist and the Christian have the same ancestry…" - Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist

... it took another six years to made G3 playable (CDP), so G3 is more form 2011... but... if you meant strictly BG'sque RPG, you're right... probably. There's some more obscure RPG BG'sque titles like "Konung 3" or "A Farewell to Dragons", but they are not a "mainstream" league.

It's interesting how the opinions of this Codex slowly change as old posters leave and newfags come. But what is most interesting was how utterly storyfag dominated the place used to be.

Click to expand...

Yes. 100x this. There may be more actionfags these days, or at least more people accepting of action combat, but there also seems to be more combatfags and otherfags around here. It sort of balances out in the end. Having said that, I still keep hearing statements like "Baldur's Gate was the decline because it didn't have C&C", but these days it's only from a select few people (repeatedly), so it's not as irritating.

Oh and Dragon Age is shit. Why bother with it when you have Knights of the Chalice? They came out in the same year I believe.

But, what's better - a bad game or a boring game? I bet on the first one, bad games like bad movies, can be very entertainment sometime (after pint or two or whole keg of good porter). Boring game is a saddest thing on the whole globe. Or universe.

Ps. Glad to see you back, sir!

Ps2. That Strange List - some notes - Mistmere (OK game, has very unusual atmosphere and seriously non-stupid story), Paradise Cracked (not OK, very not OK, features unique form of turn-based non-combat movement), Legend (Diablo for the children with cursor shaped as almost naked women, talking almost naked women...) and huh.. Loki on the first place... how lame...

bad games like bad movies, can be very entertainment sometime (after pint or two or whole keg of good porter). Boring game is a saddest thing on the whole globe. Or universe.

Click to expand...

absolutely right and I cannot agree more. This is why I rate mega shark vs giant octopus higher than the phantom menace. I have also watched the entire run of xavier renegade angel oh yes poser you have redeemed yourself

treat yourself to some more dramatic rubber fashion

however bad games also have unartistic technical fault experiences like crashes and the like, which is probably my main discouragement other than the whole finite time issue and actually good products also involving humor

That Strange List - some notes - Mistmere (OK game, has very unusual atmosphere and seriously non-stupid story), Paradise Cracked (not OK, very not OK, features unique form of turn-based non-combat movement), Legend (Diablo for the children with cursor shaped as almost naked women, talking almost naked women...) and huh.. Loki on the first place... how lame...[/FONT][/FONT]

Click to expand...

mistmere recommendation noted

legend...you mean a naked fairy, right? If I remember the preview I read, you controlled the game with a glowing fairy which also served as a light source.

That video mostly just proves how terrible Mark Meer is. Some of those lines do actually sound pretty cool when Jennifer Hale speaks them. At least the ones from ME, that is, never played the later games and not going to.

A brief tour of the Decline of proper CRPGs (non blob, non action, party based P&P simulators);

Start with Pool of Radiance (1988), for an example of a CRPG that inclined the genre and was largely untouched by Decline.

Next, play Curse of the Azure Bonds (1989), and notice how several interface issues from PoR were cleaned up, but also note that many ambitious design concepts from PoR have been simplified, streamlined and/or eliminated. For example, parlaying with monsters, finite numbers of wandering monsters, hiring NPCs from the training hall, animating party members as undead, interesting stuff to find on the overland map, dungeons that sort of make sense, etc.

Next, play Secret of the Silver Blades (1990). Some of the Decline that I attributed to Curse of the Azure Bonds may actually have occurred here. The world map has been largely eliminated/rendered irrelevant and you're mostly just fighting endless wandering monsters in a linear dungeon that no longer makes much sense at all. Somehow there are hordes of dragons and high level mages hanging out in this abandoned mine. It's worth noting however that this is a low point for the Gold Box games. They would never again be as ambitious as Pool of Radiance (1988), but they would bring back the world map and generally settle into a formula that offered solid gameplay with some P&P style adventure and more of an illusion of freedom than SotSB.

If you're taking the extended tour, it might be interesting to take a look at the Dragonlance games at this point, there was certainly a significant potential for decline as the plot was to some extent driven by NPCs from the official (bad) Dragonlance novels. Many people see them as part of the Decline. However, I would NOT consider the Dragonlance series to be true Decline, as there were a number of additional mechanics added to make the games more complex and interesting and there isn't really a significant change in the amount of freedom that is offered (not much). If Tanis Half Elven hadn't showed up to make you do something, some generic NPC/event would have.

Next, play Dark Sun: Shattered Lands (1993). Aside from the turn based combat, this game should immediately feel familiar to early 2000s CRPG players. Notice how in-level exploration has been streamlined/simplified/reduced to a shroud removing formality by the switch from first person dungeon exploration to zoomed out third person exploration. Exploration has changed from a game into a task. Notice how much more time you spend on reading text boxes and clicking on options from lists. Notice how much less time you spend on tactical combat and adventuring. Notice how the party has been reduced to four members. Notice how there is more diversity in character options and how more spells are modeled, but also notice how the tactical combat has not significantly improved. Notice how much easier the game is if you select certain types of characters.

Next, play Fallout (1997). Fallout technically belongs to its own short lived sub genre of games, but it is also highly relevant to any discussion of Decline. Take note of how much time you're now spending on reading text and selecting options from lists. Take note of how the turn based combat is so simplistic that it barely even qualifies as a game anymore. Realize that nothing of value was lost when they switched this series over to shitty FPS combat. Finally, give Ian a submachine gun and stand in front of him in a fight.

Next, play Baldur's Gate (1998). This game is highly relevant to any chronology of the Decline, but in and of itself, it is not a bad game. However, it is worth noting that the strategic ganeplay involved in party building has been replaced by simply picking from a modest sized list of recruitable characters. BG popularized real time combat in CRPGs, but since turn based combat in CRPGs hadn't significantly inclined since the very early 90s, the combat in BG isn't actually problematic. Recruitable party members will occasionally interrupt gameplay to make you read text and click an option from a list, but it isn't a significant distraction yet. Not everything is positive for this game though, it really drives home how tedious the shroud clearing task can become.

Next, play Baldur's Gate 2 (2000). In absolute terms, this is without a doubt the best CRPG ever created, but if you take the year of creation into account you can't help but feel disappointed at how little things have improved since 1989. Virtually all future decline can be traced back to this game, but in most areas it was a better game than Baldur's Gate (1998), even though you need to click through a lot more text. However, it is worth noting that party building has been simplified even further as there are not very many recruitable characters to pick from anymore. Recruitable characters are interrupting gameplay more often, but it still isn't particularly irritating. Romances appear; they will eventually transform this into a genre for perverts, but they're quite tame and minor here.

Next, play Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor (2001). Don't play for long, but get a feel for the combat in this game. Obviously, a huge step down from Baldur's Gate 2. But amazingly, the combat is not much more interesting than the combat from Curse of the Azure Bonds (1989) and it takes far longer to play. They seem to have forgotten how to design turn based games.

Next, play Knights of the Old Republic (2003). Notice that information is no longer presented to the player in a clear, 2D format, but is now obscured by messy 3D graphics. Party building has declined further, you now have only two recruitable characters as party members. But don't worry, they'll nag you quite a bit.

Next, play Temple of Elemental Evil (2003). Play through Hommlet only, you can stop after that. Sorry, that was cruel, I just wanted you to experience the worst level ever included in a CRPG, three hours of walking around, reading mundane text and clicking on options from lists. This game did finally improve turn based combat in CRPGs above 1989 standards, but was crippled by horrible level design, so it did not have any significant effect at halting or reversing the decline, aside from (probably) inspiring KoTC.

Next, play Knights of the Old Republic 2 (2004). Information is again obscured by messy 3D graphics, but this time combat has been made so incredibly easy that it is almost a formality. Many players report going through the entire game with no need to use any consumables and there is little need to pause to consider your tactics. While this game still has the mechanically robust d20 system behind it, it is on par with Fallout in terms of terrible combat gameplay, simply because the game is so easy. With combat and exploration providing negligible gameplay, most of the "game" is about reading text and clicking on options from lists. We've almost reached full decline here, we just need some romances to attract the perverts.

Next, play Knights of the Chalice (2007). Take note of the many, many ways in which turn based combat in CRPGs is finally improved from the standards of 1989. Take note of the fact that this game did not sell enough to warrant a sequel (Codexers complained about the graphics quite loudly) and that the developer is now doing a real time strategy game.

Finally, play Dragon Age and Dragon Age 2. Just be sure to pirate them.

So, a summary of the decline. Initially, exploration provided gameplay in the form of first person mazes. This was eventually replaced by the task of clearing all the shroud from the map. Eventually, this was replaced with third person 3d levels, but this didn't bring back significant amounts of gameplay to exploration. (Image of completely linear DA2 mini map goes here).

Initially, turn based combat in CRPGs was good. But then it failed to incline (in CRPGs) for like 14 years. In some significant ways it actually got worse. By the time turn based combat inclined again, it was too late.

Initially, real time with pause combat in CRPGs was not bad. But then it got bad.

Initially, building a party offered strategic gameplay. But then you just got to pick your party from an ever shrinking list of RPCs. Eventually these RPCs started trying to molest you.

Initially, gameplay was the focus of RPGs. But eventually, reading (or listening to) words and clicking options from lists became the focus of RPGs. That and molesting RPCs.